EVALUATION OF NATURAL ATTRACTIONS OF THE ISLAND OF GRAN CANARIA FOR GEOSCIENCE TOURISM REQUIREMENTS

1 EVALUATION OF NATURAL ATTRACTIONS OF THE ISLAND OF GRAN CANARIA FOR GEOSCIENCE TOURISM REQUIREMENTS Ctirad SCHEJBAL 1, David MICHALÍK 1 Institute of Geological Engineering, Faculty of Mining and Geology, VŠB-TU Ostrava 17. listopadu 15, Ostrava-Poruba, tel. (+420) 597 323 578 e-mail ctirad.schejbal@seznam.cz Abstract The study analyzes the attractions of the island of Gran Canaria and subsequently how to improve their usability for tourism. In the analysis, such attractions were chosen like monuments and beaches belonging to the Blue Flag programme. Other attractions were chosen according to their originality. The assessment of the selected attractive places is based partly on quantified criteria (distance, elevation, area, length, etc.), and on expert assessments using the criteria that affect the properties of the evaluated objects relevant to tourism. The principles of description of the selected indicators for the evaluated attractions vary by type of objects and the existing conditions of their spatial distribution and tourism facilities. The proposed methodology for evaluating attractions has proven suitable for the needs of the selection of attractions for geoscience and montanistic tourism products. The necessary data are readily obtainable both from maps and from our own observations. On the basis of the analysis, certain modifications of the selected attractions were recommended, and an cognitive excursion route oriented on attractive places of the island was designed. Key words: Natural attractions, system design of analysis, recommendations for adjustments of attractions, proposal for sightseeing tours. 1 INTRODUCTION A or cultural-historical object is characterized by both its intrinsic value, because that is studied and protected by various forms, and by external value, which is applied in tourism. These two attributes are different, and in the evaluation also other aspects are used. The attractiveness of the object or destination may be based on different principles and criteria [1]. Therefore, there are many proposals that are more or less distinct. The attractiveness of destination tourism consists generally in the expression of the region attractiveness in relation to tourist decision-making process on the objectives of travel and stay. Generally, the analysis must be based, as in other fields of human activity, on such attributes that affect the evaluation significantly [2]. Some local phenomena, relationships and characteristics but may become possible under the distinctive levels of geographic, landscape-, cultural heritage and other local systems on the valuation of municipality territory. These attributes, however, can complement the possibilities and attractiveness, for which the given destination becomes a target of tourist visits. Genius loci of certain places becomes acting intangible and immeasurable. It may happen that the implementation conditions of tourism are more important than the localization conditions. In such instances, a strong representation of human factor, an initiative of their own creators and operators of facilities and products with a direct or indirect relation to tourism has to be submitted. It is therefore obvious that no formal model can affect tourism in terms of sheer completeness [3]. From the point of view of geoscience and montanistic tourism, it is of prime importance to appreciate the attractiveness of attractions and their accessibility and facilities for visitors. The procedures for evaluating the attractiveness of a tourist destination can be divided into two main groups, namely supply- or demand-oriented ones [4]. The supply-oriented procedures consider attractiveness of tourist destination as the attraction consisting of existing resources, which affects potential visitors. They are based on the evaluation of the number, availability, distribution and presentation of all primary and secondary factors of tourism offer in the destination. In contrast, the demand-oriented approaches are mostly based on analyzes of visitor s needs, behavior and interest in the destination. Such procedures can also be divided into the group which is based on the quantitative assessment of objectively measurable variables, and the group of procedures which are based on the expert valuation of attributes. The study analyzes attractions of the island of Gran Canaria and subsequently how to improve their usability for tourism. The characterization of tourist attractions on the island of Gran Canaria is based on

own knowledge (the authors visited geoscience and anthropogenic attractions of all the large islands of the Canary Archipelago) and the sources listed in the literature (sources related to the island of Gran Canaria). From the whole Canary archipelago, it is the second most visited tourist island where you can find diverse nature from the long beaches in the south to the valley formed by lava flows inland. Gran Canaria offers to visit the pine forests in the mountains, craters, sand dunes in Maspalomas, the capital city Las Palmas, an original village, thematic parks, nightlife and much more (Fig.1). In the analysis, such attractions were chosen like monuments and beaches belonging to the Blue Flag programme. Other attractions were chosen according to their originality. 2 Fig. 1 Tourist attractions of the island of Gran Canaria (own processing with Google map) 2 SYSTEM OF ISLAND TOURIST ATTRACTIONS EVALUATION The system of tourist attractions evaluation criteria must take into account the characteristics important for determining the significance of the studied objects for their inclusion into tourism products. The assessment of the selected attractive places is based partly on quantified criteria (distance, elevation, area, length, etc.), and on expert assessments using the criteria that affect the properties of the evaluated objects relevant to tourism. This type of assessment is described by many authors, for example [5-7]. The overview of the criteria and their evaluation are given in the following Table 1. The principles of description of the selected indicators of the evaluated attractions vary by type of objects and the existing conditions of their spatial distribution and tourism facilities.

Tab. 1 Overview of the criteria and their evaluation 3 aspect category score distance from tourist resorts protected phenomenon services altitude, size, length accessibility by road accessibility from road uniqueness of place 0 90 km (per 10 km) 1-9 monument integral nature reserve Blue Flag program special nature reserve rural park parking restaurants, kiosks, rest mountains calderas rock formations gorges playas sand dunes 5 4 4 3 2 2 1 1-5 0-7 0-3 1-5 2.1 Evaluation of distance The starting point for determining the distance is the town of Maspalomas, which is located in the heart of tourist resorts in the south where most tourists come to visit annually. The limitation of the last category is determined by geographic conditions (Table 2). Tab. 2 Evaluation of distance distance [km] point distance [km] point 0-10 9 51-60 4 11-20 8 61-70 3 21-30 7 71-80 2 31-40 6 81-90 1 41-50 5 2.2 The altitude, size, length The evaluation varies depending on the type of monuments. In the category of mountain, the scoring is differentiated according to altitude, in the category of rock formation, the scoring is done by height of the rock formation, in the category caldera, the scoring is differentiated by diameter, in the category beach, the scoring is differentiated according to the length of beach, in the category of sand dunes, the scoring is differentiated by size (Table 3).

Tab. 3 Scoring according to altitude 4 mountain [m.a.s.] caldera diameter [m] rock formation relative height [m] category point category point category point under 400 1 under 200 1 under 100 1 401-800 2 201-400 2 101-300 2 801-1200 3 401-600 3 301-500 3 1201-1600 4 601-800 4 501-700 4 above 1600 5 above 800 5 above 700 5 beach length [m] gorge area [ha] sand dunes area [ha] category point category point category point under 400 1 under 150 1 under 150 1 401-900 2 151-300 2 151-300 2 901-1400 3 301-400 3 301-400 3 1401-2100 4 401-500 4 401-500 4 above 2100 5 above 500 5 above 500 5 2.3 Evaluation according to the classes of roads The accessibility by road is evaluated according to the classes of roads, by which it is best to ride to attractions, according to the marking of the attractions by the road near the attractions and the type of road near the attractions (Table 4). Tab. 4 Evaluation according to the classes of roads accessibility by classes of roads hiking trails from the road and markings type point type point 50 % highway + road I. and II. class 4 asphalted 3 50 % highway + road I. and II. class 3 paved 2 road I. and II. class 2 unpaved 1 road III. class 1 without walkways 0 marking of attractiveness on road point road surface point marked 2 asphalted 2 unmarked 1 other 1 2.4 Protected object The scoring is differentiated according to whether the object is a monument, or whether the object is on the territory that is protected by another protected space. The uniqueness of the object describes its originality and typical special features. This item is determined by the subjective evaluation of expert valuation. 2.5 Services It evaluates the attractiveness of site amenities provided by tourist services such as restaurants, shops, food stalls, rest stops and parking nearby attractions (Table 5).

Tab. 5 Attractiveness of site amenities 5 protected objects services type point type point monument 5 parking 2 integral nature reserve 4 rest stop 1 Blue Flag program 4 shops, food stalls 1 special nature reserve 3 restaurant 1 country park 2 3 DESCRIPTION OF NATURAL ATTRACTIONS The selection of the attractions included in the analysis was based on own knowledge and on the study of literature about tourist attractions and nature of the island. The selection of attractions was made under the above tables according to their required characteristics and their valuation. The following table gives examples of the data for the evaluation of attraction types. Tab. 6 Evaluation of attraction types attractions distance from tourist resorts protecte d area services altitude, diameter, height, size, length accessibility by road accessibility from road attraction uniqueness monument type Montaňa de Amagro Pico de las Nieves Caldera de Bandama Aguayro de Roque Barranco de Guayadeque Dunas de Maspalomas Playa de las Canteras 86 km monumen resting place t 47 km rural park 54 km 26 km 34 km 2 km 57 km refreshments stall, parking lot 501 AMSL 1949 AMSL monumen resting place 1 000 m t monumen t monumen t special nature reserve Blue Flag program - 540 m restaurant, shop, parking lot refreshments stall, parking lot restaurant, shop, refreshments stall, parking lot 725,5 ha 403,9 ha 2 000 m > 50 %, nonasphalted roads < 50 %, > 50 % < 50 % nonasphalted roads > 50 % roads I., II. classes, > 50 % unpaved hiking trails unpaved hiking trails paved hiking trails unpaved hiking trails paved hiking trails unpaved hiking trails - highest mountain Largest caldera - cave of indigenous peoples, most famous gorge unique and extensive sand dunes proximity to the capital mountain mountain caldera rock formation gorge sand dunes beach

In a similar manner, the data for all considered attractions of defined types was created. For such a procedure, 5 mountains, 6 rock formations, 2 calderas, 2 gorges, 1 field of sand dunes and 6 beaches, totaling 22 attractions, have been rated. The summary of valuation of the individual attractions of the island by type and suitability for tourism products including their order is contained in the following table. Tab. 7 Natural attractions of the island by type and suitability attraction type of sights score total position Barranco de Guayadeque gorge 33 1. Playa de Maspalomas playa 31 2. 3. Playa del Inglés playa 31 2. 3. Dunas de Maspalomas sand dunes 30 4. Caldera de Bandama caldera 29 5. Pico de las Nieves mountain 27 6. Roque Nublo rock formation 26 7. Riscos de Tirajana rock formation 25 8. 9. Playa de las Canteras playa 25 8. 9. Playa de San Agustín playa 24 10. 11. Playa de Amadores playa 24 10. 11. Playa de Mogán playa 23 12. Arinaga mountain 22 13. Roque Bentayga rock formation 21 14. 16. Aguayro de Roque rock formation 21 14. 16. Montaňón Negro mountain 21 14. 16. Montaňa de Tauro mountain 20 17. Caldera de los Marteles caldera 19 18. 19. Fuente de Los Azulejos rock formation 19 18. 19. Barranco del Draguillo gorge 18 20. Roque grande de Tenteniguada rock formation 16 21. Montaňa de Amagro rock formation 15 22. 6 4 SUITABILITY OF NATURAL ATTRACTIONS FOR USE IN TOURISM According to the attributed scores, the best attraction of the island for use in tourism is the gorge Barranco de Guayadeque. This gorge is suitable mainly due to the offered services (parking, shops, and restaurants), expanse, paved walkways, marking a rarity of the gorge (cave of indigenous people). Other attractions suitable for use in tourism are: Playa de Maspalomas, Playa del Inglés, and Playa de las Canteras. From the category of rock formation, appropriate rock formations Roque Nublo and Riscos de Tirajana are appropriate. Among other categories, the sand dunes of Maspalomas, Pico de la Nieves, the highest peak of the island of Gran Canaria, and the Bandama caldera (Caldera de Bandama) are suitable. All these attractions have received over 65% of points that could be achieved. Finally, another appropriate attraction for use in tourism can be Montaňa de Amagro, a rock formation, which is the least suitable attraction mainly due to its distance from tourist destinations, the lack of attraction marking along roads and the lack of services nearby the attraction (only resting place).

7 5 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PARTICULAR CATEGORY Based on the evaluation grounded on the local investigation, the recommendations for adjustments of the individual attractions amenities are given below. In the category of mountain, as for the attraction montaňa de tauro there is no parking or resting place in close proximity. Therefore, to increase tourist interest it would be appropriate to build at least a small parking lot. In addition, as for pico de la nieves, no marking of the attractions is along roads. We recommend to introduce the marking of the attraction along roads. In all attractive places in this category there are unpaved hiking trails. It would be useful, at least for pico de la nieves as the main attraction of the category, to build paved hiking trails. The conditions for the category of caldera in terms of accessibility by road and from road are sufficient and no changes or recommendations are necessary. Near the calderas, no services are provided such as stalls or restaurants and there are no parking lots, but only resting places. It would be useful to build a parking lot at Caldera de Bandama as its visit rate is higher than the attendance of Caldera de los Marteles having resting places sufficient for the visitor capacity (the amount of visitors estimated according to the frequency of occurrence in the books, according to the area and type of protected areas). The conditions for the category of rock formation from the perspective of accessibility from road are insufficient for Roque Nublo. This rock formation is a symbol of the island and one of the main attractions. Therefore, it would be appropriate to build at least some parts of paved or asphalt hiking trails. For the attraction Fuente de Los Azulejos accessible from road, the conditions cannot be assured because the attraction is placed on a rock and thus it is inaccessible by foot, and possible climbing actions could damage it. Another recommendation is to create, at least close to the attraction Riscos de Tirajana, marking along roads. For the rock formation of Roque de grande Tenteniguada it is not necessary due to the proximity of the Marteles caldera. The conditions for the category of gorge are sufficient for Barranco de Guayadeque and inadequate for Barranco del Draguillo. Insufficient marking is mainly along roads. There are no catering facilities, but this is due to low attendance. We recommend creating attractions marking along the roads. Fig. 2 Scheme of proposed tours (own processing with Google map)

The conditions for the sand dunes are sufficient. There is no need to make any changes, because it is a specific area in which any change could cause depreciation of the sand dunes and the landscape. In the category of beach, it is not necessary to make any changes because the beaches offer adequate services such as restaurants, shops, food stalls and parking. The quality of these beaches is confirmed by the fact that these beaches comply with the criteria for Blue Flag accreditation. The island of Gran Canaria belongs among the most popular tourist destinations, but is primarily used for relaxing holidays at sea, and not for cognitive activity. Site-seeing trips focused on attractions of the island of Gran Canaria is generally low, as shown by the analysis of travel agencies offers from Germany, Austria, Spain, England, Czech and Slovak Republics. Only three attractions compared in this work are at least half of the searched tours visited. These are rock formations Roque Nublo, Roque Bentayga and Mount Pico de las Nieves. For this reason, a proposal was drawn for tours focussing on the beauty of the island of Gran Canaria, which includes the routes described in Figure 2. 8 6 CONCLUSIONS The proposed methodology for evaluating attractions has proven suitable for the needs of the selection of attractions for geoscience and montanistic tourism products. Such approach is the basis for the selection of objects suitable for geoscience and montanistic tourism. The necessary data are readily obtainable both from maps and from our own observations. Thirteen attractions are used in the proposed tour. In addition to these attractions, the proposed tour contains the Beach Güi Güi as a attraction because of the popularity of hiking trails. This proposal supplements the weak supply of seeing tours on the island of Gran Canaria. The methodology used for the evaluation and selection of attractions is generally applicable for assessments of other islands of the Canary archipelago, or of other territories. REFERENCES [1] SCHEJBAL C. Evaluation of tourism object attractiveness: scientific monograph. Ed. 1st. Košice: Technical university of Košice, 2015. ISBN 978-80-553-1981-0. [2] HORNER S., SWARBROOKE J. Cestovní ruch, ubytování a stravování, využití volného času: aplikovaný marketing služeb (Tourism, accommodation and catering, leisure time). Praha: Grada, c2003. Expert (Grada). ISBN 80-247-0202-9. [3] SCHEJBAL C. Planning and designing in geoscience and montanistic tourism. Ed. 1st. Košice: Technical university of Košice, 2015. ISBN 978-80-553-1980-3 [4] KSIR T. Atraktivita a přátelskost destinace. (Attractiveness and friendliness of the destination). Ed. 1 st. University of Economics, Prague, Faculty of management, 2012. [5] AMANTI M., PECCI M., SCARASCIA MUGNOZZA G., VITTORI E. (1996). Environmental reclamation and safety conditions for recreation use of dismissed rock quarries: case studies in Central Italy. In proceedings of the 5th international symposium on Mine Planning and Equipment Selection, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 22-24 October 1996. Rotterdam, Ne; Brookfield, Vt: A.A. Balkema, 1996. ISBN 9054108274. [6] RYBÁR P. Assessment of attractiveness (value) of geotouristic objects. Acta Geoturistica. 2010, 1(2), 13-21.